The "Middle East and Terrorism" Blog was created in order to supply information about the implication of Arab countries and Iran in terrorism all over the world. Most of the articles in the blog are the result of objective scientific research or articles written by senior journalists.

From the Ethics of the Fathers: "He [Rabbi Tarfon] used to say, it is not incumbent upon you to complete the task, but you are not exempt from undertaking it."

?php
>

Friday, January 11, 2019

The Democrats’ Seismic Shift on Immigration - Jules Gomes

​by Jules Gomes

Erasing boundaries, embracing chaos.

The Apostle James might not have thought much of Chuck Schumer
or Nancy Pelosi or Dianne Feinstein or Bill Clinton or even Barack
“He-Who-Can-Do-No-Wrong” Obama. They are just some of the political
prodigies who change their policies as often as Lady Gaga changes her clothes—about five times a day.

James has a juicy jibe for such political pendulums. He calls them
“double-minded,” warning his readers that “a double-minded man is
unstable in all his ways.” If you are going to swing from policy to
policy like Tarzan the Ape Man, at least clarify and justify your
political flip-flopping.

A little over a decade ago, the
Democrats were singing in four-part harmony to President Trump’s “we
need another brick in the wall” anthem. “We simply cannot allow people
to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked, and
circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently
and lawfully to become immigrants into this country,” belted out Barack Obama.

Cue prima donna Pelosi,
2008: “Do we have a commitment to secure the border? Yes.” Why?
“Because we do need to address the issue of immigration and the
challenge we have of undocumented people in our country. We certainly do
not want any more coming in.” Solo from Chuck Schumer, Georgetown,
2009: “Illegal immigration is wrong. A primary goal of comprehensive
immigration reform must be to dramatically curtail future illegal
immigration.”

In 2013, each of the 54 Democrats in the Senate voted
for $46 billion in border security, which included 700 miles in border
fencing. Blaring through their Marxist megaphones they pleaded the
plight of low-skilled American workers whose wages were hit by cheap
immigrant labor. The burden on America’s welfare state would be
intolerable, they wailed.

So what are the sirens luring the
Democrats to the perilous shores of open borders? Why now? Why so
radically? Why display this double-mindedness in such a short span of
time?

Commentators from conservative Dan Bongino to leftwing The Atlantic
posit two political explanations. First, more illegals means more votes
for the Democrats. Second, given the contagion of the Trump Derangement
Syndrome, “Democrats hate the wall because Trump loves it” as the National Review puts it bluntly.

There is an economic explanation: globalists like George Soros, Mark
Zuckerberg and Bill Gates (the latter duo helped found the
border-busting FWD.us) have made a Faustian bargain with their
Democratic hangers-on. The UN and the EU are in the vanguard of an open
borders agenda and the Democrats are keen to keep up with the globalist
Joneses (or, in this case, Merkels) and pro-migrant Pope Francis. If not for Trump, it the US would have possibly signed up to the UN global compact on migration in December 2018.

Maybe the Democrats were lying like Pinocchio on steroids when they
said a decade ago they believed in border security and immigration
control. Maybe they never really changed their position but simply used taqiyya—the Islamic doctrine of deception—to consolidate their position with gullible voters.

The Democrat ideological pedigree would surely predispose its
activists to share Marx’s vision of nation states collapsing and workers
of the world uniting in the new egalitarian heaven on earth.

Islam, in some sense, shares the Left’s doctrine of open borders.
Especially potent in the West over the last decade, Islam’s dream is a
universal Caliphate that will bulldoze national borders and unite the
Umma—the international Muslim community—under the rule of Shariah.
Moreover, Muslims are seeking to migrate to Western countries to push
their proselytizing agenda. “Muhammad mapped a migration master plan centuries before Merkel,” is how I put it.

A boundary demarcates a nation. Tear down borders and you wipe a
nation off the map—never mind casting cartographers into outer darkness!
Marriage between a man and a woman demarcates a family—the basic unit
of society. Destroy marriage and you destroy the family. If a family can
mean anything—from serial orgies to sologamy—a family will ultimately
mean nothing.

Just before the Democrats changed their position
on geographical boundaries—they did a 180 on the boundary protecting
marriage and family. The anarchist U-turn on marriage by the Democrats
defies a number of the above explanations that explain this flip-flop
with political or economic explanations.

Above all, Trump wasn’t the tectonic factor when Democrats made a seismic shift from heterosexual to gay marriage.

In September 1996, US Congress passed the Defense of Marriage Act
(DOMA). The law defined marriage as a strictly opposite-sex institution.
Not a single Republican senator voted against the legislation; in the
House of Representatives only Republican Steven Gunderson voted against it.

Democrats strongly supported the legislation (Nancy Pelosi an
exception among leading Democrats) with House members voting in favor by
a nearly two-to-one margin (118-65) and Senate Democrats surpassing
that mark (32-14). President Bill Clinton signed DOMA into law.

By the time America’s first legal same-sex marriage took place in
2004, the Democrats had dramatically reversed their position. In the
same year, House Democrats vigorously opposed the Marriage Protection
Act by a 176-27 margin. Darel Paul in From Tolerance to Equality: How Elites brought America to Same-Sex Marriage
documents the “tremendous collapse of support within the party’s House
caucus for a traditionalist definition of marriage, from 64% in 1996 to a
mere 13% in 2004.”

He notes: “In the 1990s even the most
liberal Democrats avoided clear public endorsements of same-sex
marriage” but by “2004 all three minor Democratic candidates for
president were calling openly for national same-sex marriage.”

There is a fundamental parallel between the volte-face
on immigration and on marriage by the Democrats. Both have to do with
distinctions—and making distinctions is a biblical imperative that goes
back to the archetypal story of creation in the first chapter of the
book of Genesis.

I first spotted this when studying
intermediate Hebrew. I was memorizing Genesis 1 in Hebrew but hit the
brakes when I reached verse 4b: “And God separated the light
from the darkness.” ‘Separate’ was a funny verb! But it recurred again
and again in the chapter. Later I discovered commentator and biblical
scholar Dennis Prager’s stunning exposition
on distinctions in the Torah, explaining how separations are God’s
signature tune in creation. God himself creates separations or
distinctions or barriers or boundaries, says Prager.

The
deep-rooted problem with the Democrats is not political, economic or
even Donald Trump. It is spiritual. Radical secularization has led to a
radical removal of all boundaries—beginning with feminist bulldozing of
the boundary between man and woman and culminating paradoxically with
the gender fluidity non-existence of this boundary—much to the outrage
of some radical feminists.

Laws are predicated on boundaries.
If Democrats no longer believe in markers that distinguish right from
wrong, good from evil, lawful from lawless, order from anarchy, electing
them as lawmakers can only be self-defeating at best, suicidal at
worst.

There is, of course, one great benefit to be had from a
complete erosion of borders and boundaries—whether in the area of
immigration or in the realm of the family.

In biblical
religion, God’s boundaries in creation keeps order in place: the sea and
the land; light and darkness; day and night; human and animal; etc. The
separations serve to sustain creation and prevent it from backsliding
into primeval chaos.

In the religion of Leftism, the great
monster of chaos is a prelude to the Leviathan of the State emerging and
subduing the chaos with a view to establish its own idolatrous
hegemony.

If this is the ultimate goal of the Democratic
Party, the Chuck Schumers and Nancy Pelosis of this world might not be
so double-minded or unstable after all. On the contrary, they will be
pursuing their master plan of achieving totalitarian State control with
remarkable and ruthless single-mindedness.

Jules GomesSource: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/272466/democrats-seismic-shift-immigration-jules-gomes Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter